stac_temporal_composite

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains the compositing workflow, automatic cloud filter skipping for non-optical collections, and default values. However, it does not mention whether the tool is read-only or has any side effects, which would be helpful.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with purpose, process, Args, Returns, Tips, and Example sections. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. While somewhat lengthy, every sentence adds value and the structure aids readability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (11 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides thorough coverage: explains output format, gives example usage, and offers practical tips. It could be more explicit about error handling, but overall it is complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates by documenting all 11 parameters in the Args section, including formats (bbox, date_range), defaults (method, max_items), and domain knowledge (e.g., method options with guidance, cloud_mask rationale).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description starts with a clear statement: 'Create a temporal composite by combining multiple scenes statistically.' It explains the process of searching, downloading, and combining scenes, and distinguishes itself from sibling tool stac_time_series for per-date outputs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('creating cloud-free composites from cloudy time series') and when not to ('For per-date outputs instead of a single composite, use stac_time_series'). It includes detailed tips for method selection and enables cloud_mask for best results.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.